How Does Interracial Coalition Evolve Over Time? Issue Framing and the Racial Boundaries of Political Alliance

• In Event: The Problematics of Racial and Ethnic Coalition-Building in an Era of Explicit Threat

Abstract

Theories of social movements emphasize grievance framing as central to mobilization, yet its capacity to build or fracture interracial coalitions over time remains underexplored. Frames that invoke race, ethnicity, and diversity may foster cross-racial alliance, but they can also constrain coalition formation in specific historical contexts, in particular in response to external political threat. To examine how organizational actors frame policy claims and how these choices shape coalition dynamics, we conduct a qualitative content analysis of approximately 100 amicus curiae briefs filed before the U.S. Supreme Court between 1970 and 2021 by Black, Latino, and Asian American advocacy organizations. We identify three recurring framing strategies: racial-exclusive, racial-neutral, and diversity frames. While racial-exclusive and diversity frames foreground structural inequalities and endorse race-conscious remedies, the racial-neutral frame advances a colorblind approach that prioritizes individual rights over group-based remedies. Although the diversity frame offers the broadest coalition appeal, this inclusiveness comes with a tradeoff: expanding the scope of inequality claims can attenuate the salience of specific group grievances.

Authors

• Muna Adem, University of Notre Dame

• Brenton Kalinowski, Indiana University-Bloomington

• Dina G. Okamoto, Indiana University-Bloomington